Lucitone 199 problem

[TomZ]

The word was tumble. ie; a sloshing motion.

I did not advise to shake. Up and down motion or vigorous shaking like that machine may actually exascerbate the separation of the finer particles from the coarse.

 

[dmonwaxa]

I Tumble for Ya...

YouTube - Boy George - I'll Tumble 4 Ya

Not a great version, kinda like the current acrylic

 

[JohnWilson]

Unless the finer particles are lighter than the coarser ones I see no difference, maybe I am blind.

I had to send the driver to pick up some denatured alcohol so here I thought I was so smart

Just to be on the safe side since Tommy says so I will gently roll the big container around the floor on Monday.

Have a good weekend guys.

 

[araucaria]

Maybe you're sitting on the san andreas fault line and the tremors are causing the particles to separate
Have you stumbled upon a new early warning system? orangey tint dentures mean a quake's coming

 

[rkm rdt]

ound:

 

[JohnWilson]

Maybe you're sitting on the san andreas fault line and the tremors are causing the particles to separate
Have you stumbled upon a new early warning system? orangey tint dentures mean a quake's coming

e me smile

 

[araucaria]

John, all tongue-in-cheek
Maybe the new name for a denture coming out orangey is a 'Richter denture'

 

[rkm rdt]

I hope its not faulty.

 

[araucaria]

I hope its not faulty.

 

[AJEL]

If U shoot and reload I find the brass tumbler works great to keep the acrylic powder from changing. I have found it works with expansion stone that I use for Acetal Temporary Orthotics (my name for snap on smile). Vynapac from Vynacron is stored in the fridge and the compressor vibrations separate it and I always have to shake it, so I developed the habit.

 

[rkm rdt]

It's probably HIS fault!

 

[araucaria]

Qué!

 

[cdr50]

It has been my experience that every material that goes into a product has a reason that it is in the product instead of a similar, usually less expensive, material.
That is unless a company no longer understands the reason that said material was in the product in the first place.
Case in point here is Lucitone 199 and their introduction just a few years ago of a “New, More Natural Looking Fiber”. It is purely conjecture on my part but guessing how expensive the original fiber was in that product they could have been looking for a way to manufacture the product and cut costs. They soon found out how important fiber is in the shading (coloring) of their Lucitone 199. Prehaps even more important is how choosing the correct fiber to incorporate into the Lucitone 199 base polymer without loosing impact strength was pretty important as well. Taking a quote from their website “Lucitone 199 is the premium denture acrylic in the industry. Unsurpassed strength and customer preferred shading confirm Lucitone 199 as simply the best - the industry gold standard”.

From the reports and complaints I heard around the industry at that time about Lucitone 199 someone at that company must have decided they had to go back to what must have been called the “Old, Less Natural Looking Fiber” to try and get that product back on track.

So is anyone left in the denture acrylics division that really understands what is going on and why?

I think that is a legitimate question.

 

[Stuffdogg]

well after reading this im just curious... Who here is still using 199 and how many have made the switch from 199 to another and why? I see Diamond D as being the product people here seem to be going to. It is a little less expensive so Is it Really superior and why or is it just a matter of opinion.

 

[TomZ]

I was involved in the development of the product from a laboratory beta testing standpoint. I have been using it before it went to market.
The difference between all high impact acrylics is the "impact modifier" used in the manufacture of each. Diamond D uses a different impact modifier in its composition than 199. This gives it different characteristics in strength, packing consistency, bonding ability, ect.

Alice Sager a nationally know speaker and removable prosthetic technician with Vident and no affiliation with Keystone Industries attests to the fact that her in-house and return repairs have dropped to almost nothing.

Mark Jackson a key opinion leader in our industry offers a lifetime guarantee on any dentures he makes with Diamond D and now uses it exclusively for his implant borne and retained prosthetics.

The superiority of a product is best judged by the individual user. Call 1-800-333-3131 and ask Denise or Kathy for a sample, and judge for yourself.
They will send you enough of the original shaded material to make about 5 dentures.If you have any other questions you can contact me. Im a technical consultant and lab owner associated with Keystone Industries.

 

[lcmlabforum]

My removable guy told me Dentsply made a recent change to the formula recently again and was 'sticking to the cast' more. Mind you, he knows what he is doing and and have also switched to Diamond D. Anyone else have similar problems with sticking recently?
LCM

 

[Stuffdogg]

I've used both Diamond D and 199 and like both. The only difference I can observe as a tech is in packing and the look and shade. Finishing is about the same. I have not use Diamond D enough to gauge its durability(frequency of repairs and color stability) against 199.

from the numbers have read about, impact strength is greater on Diamond D with studies using notched Izod tests. (over .8 for Diamond D and under .6 with 199)

this was from the Journal of prosthetic Dentistry in 2008:

Mean static flexure strength (SDs) in MPa were: Eclipse, 127.11 (5.83); Diamond D, 84.92 (5.10); Lucitone 199, 83.96 (11.96); HI-I, 79.54 (5.84); and Nature-Cryl Hi-Plus, 75.82 (6.96).

Mean flexural strengths (SDs) in MPa postcycling were: Eclipse, 113.36 (31.29); Diamond D, 88.26 (5.46); Nature-Cryl Hi-Plus, 81.86 (4.93); HI-I, 79.18 (6.60); and Lucitone 199, 74.34 (4.95).

...close to the same numbers here on flexural strength but diamond d did out perform 199 a bit in this study, So unless someone can sway me otherwise because of something im missing here, id say Diamond D is the way to go. It costs less plus it has a cooler name! Go big D... lol !!!!

 

[Stuffdogg]

My removable guy told me Dentsply made a recent change to the formula recently again and was 'sticking to the cast' more. Mind you, he knows what he is doing and and have also switched to Diamond D. Anyone else have similar problems with sticking recently?
LCM

now that you mention it, YES!!! I have been having a lot of the stone sticking problem with 199 but had not even though of it being the resin! And the last case I did with Diamond D broke out very clean and easy. I think I'm switching for sure.

 

[Flipperlady]

My removable guy told me Dentsply made a recent change to the formula recently again and was 'sticking to the cast' more. Mind you, he knows what he is doing and and have also switched to Diamond D. Anyone else have similar problems with sticking recently?
LCM

I use the 199 and have been watching for anything different because of what I'm reading here and have noticed a slight difference in the shade. The problem your tech is having could mean several different things. I haven't had an issue with acrylic sticking.

 

[CShof]

I made the switch from Lucitone 199 to Diamond D about a month ago and so far I'm happy. The only real difference I noticed was the Diamond D doesnt seem to have quite as many fibers but it still looks good to me and I haven't had anybody complain. I've always had luck with Lucitone in that I can't remember the last denture I made that came back with a fracture, I sure hope Diamond D can deliver the same results. So far so good though and I right now I have no regrets about making the switch.